FAA is stupid. so are commuter airlines.

[synclastica_86]

Originally Posted by express705

will anyone realize that you DO NOT FLY PROP PLANES IN COLD/ICE CONDITIONS?


does it seriously take crashes and lost lives to realize what is so easy to see?

prop planes DO NOT WORK WELL in snow/ice.

icing KILLS.

OMG what a retarded statement. This is what actually happens:

Sometimes, water in the atmosphere can become super-cooled (having a temperature below freezing point but remaining as a liquid) in the atmosphere. This happens when the gradient of cooling exceeds a certain constant (i.e. the water is being cooled too fast). When the super-cooled water droplets experience some external disturbance, for example, the striking of an aircraft's wing, it rapidly takes on a crystal structure.The real issue is when ice starts to form and accumulate on the wings as it strikes those super-cooled water droplets. This create micro turbulence on the wing surface that can reduce lift generated. Basically, ice prevents the air from "sticking" to the wing (this is analogous to the hydrodynamics of a shark's skin). So, prop or no prop, all planes can be affected by this issue. The only way to counter that is the use of a de-icing system.

[krote345]

Originally Posted by synclastica_86

OMG what a retarded statement. This is what actually happens:

Sometimes, water in the atmosphere can become super-cooled (having a temperature below freezing point but remaining as a liquid) in the atmosphere. This happens when the gradient of cooling exceeds a certain constant (i.e. the water is being cooled too fast). When the super-cooled water droplets experience some external disturbance, for example, the striking of an aircraft's wing, it rapidly takes on a crystal structure.The real issue is when ice starts to form and accumulate on the wings as it strikes those super-cooled water droplets. This create micro turbulence on the wing surface that can reduce lift generated. Basically, ice prevents the air from "sticking" to the wing (this is analogous to the hydrodynamics of a shark's skin). So, prop or no prop, all planes can be affected by this issue. The only way to counter that is the use of a de-icing system.

Not saying I agree or disagree but OP made the valid point that prop planes fly lower than turbine-engined aircraft which makes them more susceptible to this icing scenario.

[bmstyle71]

Experienced pilot? Bahaha flight simulator doesn't count. That's the most retarded statement I've heard a pilot let alone an 'experienced' pilot say. What about the 737 that's crashed in Washington remember that? Stop talking you're embarassing yourself

[Express]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

I remember that accident happened at Washington national airport....coz the 732 was lined up for takeoff for too long after its only de-icing....snow and ice accumlate on its wings during the hold....and the crew did not turn on the de-icing switch....
the aircraft had liftoff a little bit but not enough to encounter the disruption of airflow on the wings....finally crashed into freezing river....

thats one of a NUMBER of things those idiots did wrong that day.

1-since the tug didnt have chains, they opted to use reverse thrust to back out of the terminal. they sucked in alot of shit into those engines, damaging them.

2-they didnt have de ice on.

3-the plane was de iced, but sat for too long for it to do anything.

4-they followed closely to another jet, using its exhaust gasses to melt ice off the wings, when all they really did was push the ice to one side of the wings.

5- full power was not used on takeoff, due to false readings from the damaged engines.

[Express]

Originally Posted by bmstyle71

Experienced pilot? Banana flight simulator doesn't count. That's the most retarded statement I've heard a pilot let alone an 'experienced' pilot say. What about the 737 that's crashed in Washington remember that? Stop talking you're embarassing yourself

damn ya caught me! i surrender my license to you.

[bmstyle71]

Originally Posted by krote345

Not saying I agree or disagree but OP made the valid point that prop planes fly lower than turbine-engined aircraft which makes them more susceptible to this icing scenario.

It was at 2000 feet. Jets have to go through that altitude to land too you know. This didn't happen at 40 000 feet

[Express]

i meant lower during approach. not at cruise (which still is a bit lower.)

[quagmire]

From the press release on TV now, looks like they lost control of the aircraft when they selected to extend the flaps to 15 degrees.

[Express]

from cnn, i heard:

pilots were heard on the CVR discussing severe ice buildup on windsheild and wings.

[FStop7]

Originally Posted by express705

from cnn, i heard:

pilots were heard on the CVR discussing severe ice buildup on windsheild and wings.

Duh

What's that have to do with your moronic point about prop planes, though?

[Express]

everything is moronic or retarded to all of you.

im entitled to my opinion, as retarded or moronic as it may be. and it stands. i do not think the FAA should allow prop planes in places where icing is located.

i dont know the dash 8 that well, so i ask-

does that airplane have pneumatic deicing boots?

[Nate2046]

Sounds like tail icing, of course I don't know that and neither does the OP, its just pure speculation. Even so it doesn't mean that turboprops are patently unsafe in weather. I think the safety record speaks to that. Of course, if this was all the result of something completely unrelated to the ice, (prop into beta?), then the whole discussion is moot.

[Express]

if this turns out to be a prop issue its gonna be like that whole hamilton standard case years ago.

[Jammin Jason]

you'd think not flying a plane during a blizzard (cold/icy condition) is COMMON SENSE

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by Jammin Jason

you'd think not flying a plane during a blizzard (cold/icy condition) is COMMON SENSE

Here we go again...
1) THere were no "blizard" conditions -- light snow in area
2) the OAT was not extreme, but withing icing favorable range
3) There was some icing reported between 6000 and 3500' AGL, 1/4", but nothing serious ////CORRECTION -- THe jet behing Embraer 190 reported significant icing 20 miles south...

I have seen MUCH MUCH worse conditions that are completely OK to fly...

This accident probably has the icing involved, but other factors (bank, auto pilot disengage, flaps out (slow down), gear down (slow down)...) all occured at about this time...

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by express705

everything is moronic or retarded to all of you.

im entitled to my opinion, as retarded or moronic as it may be. and it stands. i do not think the FAA should allow prop planes in places where icing is located.

i dont know the dash 8 that well, so i ask-

does that airplane have pneumatic deicing boots?

I think some of us were too harsh responding to your initial statement...

Anyway, yes, Dash 8 has pneumatic deicing boots, cabin activated. I am not sure if they have them on tail leading edge, probably not...

Another interesting write-up: http://forums.jetphotos.net/showpost...9&postcount=65

[Hawker 800XP]

Originally Posted by quagmire

From the press release on TV now, looks like they lost control of the aircraft when they selected to extend the flaps to 15 degrees.

I'd bet that was the cause, changing CG, then losing control.

[777ER]

Originally Posted by krote345

These jets have de-icing equipment that is made for these conditions. They have been flying this route for forever and this is the first incident that I can remember. Don't jump to conclusions before you have all of the facts. The United States aircraft accident record is pretty damn impressive.

Careful with the 'de-ice' and 'anti-ice' terms in aviation...

De-ice = ice is allowed to be built up then it is removed mechanically (pneumatic de-ice boots in leading edges) or electrical (heat blankets).
It either breaks off in chucks or in small pieces.

Ever wonder why there's a thick patch in the prop path on the side of the aircraft?
That's for when the electrical de-icer boots on the blades heats up, chucks of ice is gonna get slung at the aircraft and makes a loud bang or thump noise (can be heard from the inside).

Anti-ice = warm or hot bleed air pumped into leading edges of wings, rudder, horz stab....prevents ice from being built up (must be turned on before entering icing conditions)


De-ice is found on most prop to turbo-prop aircrafts.

Anti-ice is used on jets (hot bleed air)

[777ER]

Originally Posted by E90SLAM

I remember that accident happened at Washington national airport....coz the 732 was lined up for takeoff for too long after its only de-icing....snow and ice accumlate on its wings during the hold....and the crew did not turn on the de-icing switch....
the aircraft had liftoff a little bit but not enough to encounter the disruption of airflow on the wings....finally crashed into freezing river....

There's no de-icing switch on the 732. It's anti-ice.

There's more to the story than just inexperience and the hold...

The aircraft was deiced by the airport workers while it was at the gate waiting for the weather to clear up a lil.

then the tug had problems getting enough traction in the snow to pushback the 732...
the captain then elected to use the thrust reversers to assist in the pushback to reduce the departure delay...

it did work...but the thrust reversers did kick up snow and slush from the ground onto the top of the wing...and some of that ended up going into the intake of the engine

the pitot tube in the intake of the engines got snow/slush into it and it gave a false high reading (smaller diameter now, high velocity flow)...

so the crew sets the EPR (Engine Pressure Ratio, it's a power setting used on the P&W engines) for takeoff...down the runway it goes.....aircraft stalls (airspeed & angle of attack) and down it went into the river.

Right before the airspeed stalled (during climbout phase) the crew noticed the aircraft wasn't gaining enough speed as it should and added more power which was too late in this case (aircraft stalled already).
They did notice it took a long time to gain speed during the takeoff run...

The findings? Engine power was set too low due to false EPR reading.

[777ER]

Originally Posted by dr325i

3) There was some icing reported between 6000 and 3500' AGL, 1/4", but nothing serious ////CORRECTION -- THe jet behing Embraer 190 reported significant icing 20 miles south...

Uh that was reported by a Delta MD-88 flying inbound to BUF and reported 1/4" to 1/2" of ice buildup on the wings.

How can they see the wings on a MD-88 and see the ice buildup?...the wings are set far back.

If you didn't notice, there's no anti-icing in the horz stab or the rudder on the ERJ-170/175, 190/195...

Just the wing leading edge and the engine intakes have anti-ice...

the ERJ-135/145 does have anti-icing in the wing and the tail...

[FStop7]

Originally Posted by Jammin Jason

you'd think not flying a plane during a blizzard (cold/icy condition) is COMMON SENSE

Holy shit. Are you serious? Are you really serious?

Look at the altitudes that airliners cruise at and check out what the temperatures are at those altitudes on even the warmest days, and get back to us.

[E90SLAM]

Originally Posted by 777ER

There's no de-icing switch on the 732. It's anti-ice.

There's more to the story than just inexperience and the hold...

The aircraft was deiced by the airport workers while it was at the gate waiting for the weather to clear up a lil.

then the tug had problems getting enough traction in the snow to pushback the 732...
the captain then elected to use the thrust reversers to assist in the pushback to reduce the departure delay...

it did work...but the thrust reversers did kick up snow and slush from the ground onto the top of the wing...and some of that ended up going into the intake of the engine

the pitot tube in the intake of the engines got snow/slush into it and it gave a false high reading (smaller diameter now, high velocity flow)...

so the crew sets the EPR (Engine Pressure Ratio, it's a power setting used on the P&W engines) for takeoff...down the runway it goes.....aircraft stalls (airspeed & angle of attack) and down it went into the river.

Right before the airspeed stalled (during climbout phase) the crew noticed the aircraft wasn't gaining enough speed as it should and added more power which was too late in this case (aircraft stalled already).
They did notice it took a long time to gain speed during the takeoff run...

The findings? Engine power was set too low due to false EPR reading.

Thanks for clearing up the details...I've only watched "Seconds from Disaster from National Geographic" a while ago....forgot the part where the crew used reverse thrust to clear some snow and got some stuck in pitot tube or so....

Aircrash Investigation and Seconds from Disaster are some on my favorate shows....its just sad that some little careless-ness and distraction lead to disaster....